Swissgov presentation 23rd September 2010

Gov2.0 in Switzerland: from conversation to action
Federal Veterinary Office Event - #fibosimo
23 rd September 2010
David Osimo
Tech4i2 ltd.

Structure of the talk
What is government 2.0
Some examples
The benefits and limits of government 2.0
What to do

So far ICT has not fundamentally changed government
1990s: ICT expected to make government more transparent, efficient and user oriented
2005+: disillusion as burocracy not much different from 19 th century Max Weber’s description
Supply Demand

Relevant for key government activities source: “Web 2.0 in Government: Why and How? www.jrc.es Back office Front office Regulation Cross-agency collaboration Knowledge management Interoperability Human resources mgmt Public procurement Service delivery eParticipation Law enforcement Public sector information Public communication Transparency and accountability

Technologies… Blogs Wordpress, Movable Type, Blogger, Typepad Wikis Wikipedia, Twiki, Confluence, SocialText Syndication RSS, Atom News feed aggregation Google Reader, Bloglines, NewsGator Personal dashboards / mashups Netvibes, MyYahoo, iGoogle, Yahoo Pipes Bookmarking / Tagging Delicious, Cogenz, ConnectBeam Micro-blogging/messaging Twitter, Yammer, Socialtext Signals Instant messaging Sametime, MSN, Skype Social Networking Platforms (Enterprise) Facebook, Bebo, Myspace, Tuenti, Netlog IBM (Lotus Connections), Socialtext Confluence, Jive (Social Business Software) Thoughtfarmer, Microsoft (Office Sharepoint Server 2007), Oracle (Beehive), Incentivelive, Salesforce Chatter Prediction Markets Consensus Point, Inkling Ideas banks Uservoice, Ideascale

Values, not only tools

Examples of gov20 adoption by government

Policy blog
Maintaining conversations with key stakeholders, and reaching out beyond the usual suspect
http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/innovationunlimited/

The wikipedia of FBI and CIA
Created to prevent a new 9-11
Used by 16 US security agencies – on a super-secure intranet (not public)
Based on wikipedia software
Used by two-thirds of the analysts, esp. ever younger workforce. Flat, informal cooperation
Each day, 50 to 100 new articles posted and 3,000 to 6,000 articles edited by users.
Makes collaboration by individual and agency traceable and measurable
Also: mash-up tools enable analysts to bring together different applications and data
Successes:
Main tool used in constructing a National Intelligence Estimate on Nigeria
Quickly detected how Iraqi insurgents were using chlorine in explosives
Risks:
too much information sharing, and cultural resistance
BUT it’s “worth it”: "the key is risk management, not risk avoidance."

Bottom-up self-organisation

Citizens reporters

Open data

Open Innovation in public services

Innovating government from the outside in Jose Alonso, W3c

Analysis

It’s not about total participation Source: IPTS estimation based on Eurostat, IPSOS-MORI, Forrester
4.Providing attention, taste data
3.Using user-generated content
2.Providing ratings, reviews
1.Producing content
100% 3% 40% of Internet users (50% of EU population) 10%

Why does gov20 matter?
Because it does not impose change (e-gov 1.0) but acts on leverages , drivers and incentives:
reducing the cost of collective action : innovation without permission
building on unique and specific knowledge of citizens and civil servants : the “cognitive surplus”
the power of visualization
reducing information and power asymmetries
peer recognition rather than hierarchy
changing the expectations of citizens

Views from the field
“ There are more smart people outside government than within it” (Bill Joy)
“ the coolest thing to do with your data will be thought of by someone else” (Rufus Pollock)
“ A problem shared is a problem halved ...and a pressure group created” (Paul Hodgkin – PatientOpinion.com)
“ it’s about pressure points, chinks in the armour where improvements might be possible, whether with the consent of government or not” (Tom Steinberg, Mysociety.org)
“ many participants in the process dilute the effect of bad apples or unconstructive participants” (Beth Noveck, Peertopatent.org)

The risks and governance of gov20
Between no participation and information overload
Conflictual content? The role of moderation
Representativeness vs relevance
The bosses: do we need permission?

The limits of transparency
Most countries don’t have MySociety.org or Sunlightfoundation.org
Government 2.0 services and websites are used by a minority of citizens
Without attention and civic culture, transparency is unlikely to generate change

We should design gov 2.0 for Bart, not only for Lisa Hat tip: Carter and Dance, Nytimes.com

“ with the ideal of naked transparency alone--our democracy, like the music industry and print journalism generally, is doomed. The Web will show us every possible influence. The most cynical will be the most salient. Limited attention span will assure that the most salient is the most stable. Unwarranted conclusions will be drawn, careers will be destroyed, alienation will grow.”
Lawrence Lessig, 2009. Against Transparency

It’s a gradual process: from a static to a dynamic vision
Attention and civic culture are not fixed
Visualisation increases participation
Conversations increase trust
Game and social dimension increases participation
Transparency builds civic culture

What to do?
Do no harm
Open data
Competitions for innovation
Education, education, education
Start playing with it

Thank you
[email_address]
@osimod
http://egov20.wordpress.com
Further information:
Osimo, 2008. Web2.0 in government: why and how? www.jrc.es
Osimo, 2008. Benchmarking e-government in the web 2.0 era: what to measure, and how . European Journal of ePractice, August 2008.

Maplight.org

Jose Alonso, W3c

Swissgov presentation 23rd September 2010

by osimod

Accessibility

Upload Details

Usage Rights

2 Embeds 58

Statistics

Swissgov presentation 23rd September 2010 Presentation Transcript

http://egov20.wordpress.com	57
http://ictlogy.net	1